Matusz Optioned To Norfolk After The Game

[Malike]

Ultimately, what it boils down to is the front office, for whatever stupid reason thinks this team can contend and they are not going keep rolling the same fodder out there who takes the team out of the game in the first four innings on a consistent basis. Which is what all three of Hunter, Matusz, and Arietta are doing.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

[Flash- bd]

Hammel and Chen have had the advantage of being new to the league. The longer the season goes on, the less effective they've been. Just because they have had good starts to the season, doesn't mean they will not regress, as we have been seeing lately.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

Err...Hammel pitched 2 1/2 years in the AL East. He also threw 17 IP w/o an ER against two NL teams, one of which he came in with a 8+ ERA in a relatively large sample against.

Nice analysis. Hammel and Chen will regress.

[SrMeowMeow]

You're ignoring the broader point here. Arrieta was mediocre in 2010. He was worse last year. But his FIP and ERA were very close, as they are for the vast majority of pitchers. His strand rate, by the way, was around 70%, and is lower by a huge 10% this year. He has never in the past demonstrated that he's some sort of FIP anomaly, or that he can't pitch out of the stretch, or that he struggles under the pressure of RISP. Those data outweigh his 97.2 IP this year when you're trying to argue that he's miraculously turned into a pitcher who is completely responsible for the biggest difference between FIP and ERA this season (1.80). His BABIP is up and his strand rate is down from his career numbers. He's getting strikeouts and he's lowered his walk rate. His line drive rate is up which could explain the BABIP, but his SIERA (a FIP alternative that includes batted ball data) is a very good 3.78. Everything points to him being a victim of bad situational karma/luck. If you want to argue that he's an anomaly, make that argument. Don't just shrug your shoulders and agree to disagree. Do some legwork, because you're making an outlandish claim. Unless you really have a reason to shake the foundations of some very reliable statistical analysis, I wouldn't be so glib.

Just an addendum about the difference between Jake's ERA and FIP (1.80). One pitcher in baseball history has sustained a higher difference (i.e. defied his FIP), and he was Bill Kissinger, who played from 1895-1897. In the last 50 years, the highest difference in ERA and FIP has been 1.16. Only seven pitchers have sustained a difference above 1.00. There is no physical possibility that Jake is as bad as his ERA looks. It is impossible. His ERA is inflated because of factors outside his pitching performances (i.e. defense, bad luck). I will put any money you like on his ERA going forwards being closer to his 2012 FIP to date than his 2012 ERA to date.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Yes, and at what point is that? Look at the top guys in ERA right now and check out how their careers went. It's not always a smooth ride: Johnny Cueto, Ryan Dempster, Ryan Vogelsong, Jordan Zimmerman, Kyle Lohse, Zack Greinke, Jake Peavy, etc. all had considerable stretches of very mediocre-downright bad pitching before they finally put it together. Need I mention Jason Hammel?

Greinke had one bad year his second year in the majors. Hammel was a near 4 WAR pitcher for 2 years in Colorado after 28 ML starts. Cueto's first two years weren't great, but he was durable and showed steady improvement. I haven't looked at the rest. They don't compare and those are apparently one's you've cherry picked. There are plenty of pitchers that have done better in less time than the ones we have. I've already said that I know you have to be patient with yong pitching. I get it. We have devoted a tone a ton of resources into this but we're talking about across the board failure here and in most cases, regression.

The best you seem to have is that Arrieta's peripherals look better, Tillman looks better in AAA, and we need to lay off these guys. I think we need to reflect on our epic failure and re-think what we've been doing. Hopefully DD is doing just that. Maybe Peterson is part of that, and fixing Tillman is a first step. I don't know, but this level failure is not normal, nor should it be rationalized. We disagree.

[SrMeowMeow]

Eh, couldn't his FIP rise and come closer to his actual ERA?

Anything's possible, but that's not really how it works. FIP is better, on average, at predicting future ERA than ERA itself is. Of course in individual cases anything can happen, but if you have to put money down, put it on FIP unless you have hundreds and hundreds of innings demonstrating that a pitcher is a FIP anomaly (Matt Cain is the premier contender).

[SteveO]

Yeah, and I can remember a lot of people making much more nuanced arguments than what you're making (which basically amounts to: look, Brian and Jake's ERAs and W-L records are bad. Thus, they're not good enough to be with the big club. Send them down.) for why Jason Hammel was no good. So what? Citing Daniel Cabrera's case doesn't prove anything for your point...

You do realize the irony here, don't you?

This should answer your question...

Hammel??? How many 5.00 ERA or greater seasons with a won loss record like Arrieta has he had???? That's right....NONE in past 5 yrs including this one. Not to mention he pitched in Colorado. Again as I have said not saying Jake cant pitch or wont be good. Just saying right now for a team trying to win, he is not pitching at a level that is good enough. If you cant see that then I dont know what to say.

So showing up to work completely unprepared like Matusz did last year is not lazy, not being a primadona, not acting entitled or being a headcase........ Through on top of that the attitude he had....oiy vey. I dont question Jake's effort cause he has never given us reason to. Matusz has and if he did not want that albatross on his neck he should have shown up ready to play.

I give up ....Ok lets just trot them out there every 5 days and when the end of the year comes and they have both lost 16 games with 5.00+ ERA's you can come up with all new excuses for them.

At what point do results matter to you? Not being a smartass...asking a serious question.

[MrOrange82]

You're ignoring the broader point here. Arrieta was mediocre in 2010. He was worse last year. But his FIP and ERA were very close, as they are for the vast majority of pitchers. His strand rate, by the way, was around 70%, and is lower by a huge 10% this year. He has never in the past demonstrated that he's some sort of FIP anomaly, or that he can't pitch out of the stretch, or that he struggles under the pressure of RISP. Those data outweigh his 97.2 IP this year when you're trying to argue that he's miraculously turned into a pitcher who is completely responsible for the biggest difference between FIP and ERA this season (1.80). His BABIP is up and his strand rate is down from his career numbers. He's getting strikeouts and he's lowered his walk rate. His line drive rate is up which could explain the BABIP, but his SIERA (a FIP alternative that includes batted ball data) is a very good 3.78. Everything points to him being a victim of bad situational karma/luck. If you want to argue that he's an anomaly, make that argument. Don't just shrug your shoulders and agree to disagree. Do some legwork, because you're making an outlandish claim. Unless you really have a reason to shake the foundations of some very reliable statistical analysis, I wouldn't be so glib.

Hi, have we met? I'm Frequently Glib.

As I've stated, my opinions are rooted in watching Arrieta's games. All of them. I can't recall very many times where I sat back and thought to myself, "well, that was unlucky." And I'm sorry if it's frustrating, but I'm simply not going to dedicate the time to digging up numbers to make your kind of argument. CA-ORIOLE alluded to some, but (1) I'm busy (i.e., I probably shouldn't even be typing this much), and (2) IMO, Arrieta's results really do speak for themselves. This isn't me looking at box scores and saying "aww, that ERA is awful." It's me paying attention to what he's done on the diamond and being completely dissatisfied. If baseball's somehow evolved beyond opinions based on that kind of information (i.e., two eyes), then it's all yours.

[Malike]

Err...Hammel pitched 2 1/2 years in the AL East. He also threw 17 IP w/o an ER against two NL teams, one of which he came in with a 8+ ERA in a relatively large sample against.

Nice analysis. Hammel and Chen will regress.

Ah yes, of course. He pitched to a 6 era for Tampa from 06 to 08, I'm sure the league remembers all about him. Lets have this chat in August about regression. Apparently, your crystal ball is more accurate than mine.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

[SteveO]

Just an addendum about the difference between Jake's ERA and FIP (1.80). One pitcher in baseball history has sustained a higher difference (i.e. defied his FIP), and he was Bill Kissinger, who played from 1895-1897. In the last 50 years, the highest difference in ERA and FIP has been 1.16. Only seven pitchers have sustained a difference above 1.00. There is no physical possibility that Jake is as bad as his ERA looks. It is impossible. His ERA is inflated because of factors outside his pitching performances (i.e. defense, bad luck). I will put any money you like on his ERA going forwards being closer to his 2012 FIP to date than his 2012 ERA to date.

Well if its not his pitching then its the "factors outside his pitching performance" which indicates that these factors only happen to him since he is the only pitcher on the team with that large a differential between FIP and ERA.

Also FIP assumes that all balls are hit equally ...they do not take into account factors like line drives etc which if you look at Jake gets tattooed a lot by

All I am saying and have been saying is that the guy cant get out of the 5th inning in over half his starts, he has a 5.00 ERA + and his WHIP and W-L are not stellar. On a team trying to compete he is not ready. That does not mean he will not be good in the future or have a major role ...it means he is not ready NOW

[CA-ORIOLE]

Just an addendum about the difference between Jake's ERA and FIP (1.80). One pitcher in baseball history has sustained a higher difference (i.e. defied his FIP), and he was Bill Kissinger, who played from 1895-1897. In the last 50 years, the highest difference in ERA and FIP has been 1.16. Only seven pitchers have sustained a difference above 1.00. There is no physical possibility that Jake is as bad as his ERA looks. It is impossible. His ERA is inflated because of factors outside his pitching performances (i.e. defense, bad luck). I will put any money you like on his ERA going forwards being closer to his 2012 FIP to date than his 2012 ERA to date.

Ok, How many pitchers stay in the majors when they are getting the crap beat out of them? Either, Arrieta will get better as a starting pitcher and his FIP/ERA will normalize (as you say) or he'll be out of baseball, or he'll need to go the the BP where he may likely improve. I don't discount some element of bad luck, but hittters are actually hitting him pretty hard. rWAR and tERA take that fact into account and don't show him so favorably.

[Flash- bd]

The best you seem to have is that Arrieta's peripherals look better, Tillman looks better in AAA, and we need to lay off these guys. I think we need to reflect on our epic failure and re-think what we've been doing. Hopefully DD is doing just that. Maybe Peterson is part of that, and fixing Tillman is a first step. I don't know, but this level failure is not normal, nor should it be rationalized. We disagree.

With what? I haven't really taken any stance/argued anything in this thread so much as I've made fun of the more silly-outlandish comments. As for the first line above, most of that I haven't said anywhere in this thread (Tillman looks better in AAA being the exception). SrMeowMeow is doing a fine job arguing whatever reasonable point there is to argue in this whole thing, and given that I've argued something pretty similar to what he's arguing right now (the historical take is a nice touch, though) many times over, I'm good with that.

(As for your objection to my counter-example: I'm "cherry-picking" from the top 20 ERAs in the bigs. If you want to go down the list we can find even more apt examples. The qualifications you make also really don't do much to take away from the general idea of my post...)

Ah yes, of course. He pitched to a 6 era for Tampa from 06 to 08, I'm sure the league remembers all about him. Lets have this chat in August about regression. Apparently, your crystal ball is more accurate than mine.

Yes--I'm sure they do. Advanced scouts don't usually lose 2 1/2 years of data. And again, where do I make any claim about Hammel? How can you say my crystal ball is more accurate (sarcastically) than yours when I didn't even bring mine out? All I did was point out how worthless your argument was.

But, sure, I'd be willing to bet Jason Hammel will finish with an ERA under 4 this year. So if you want to have a "chat" come August, there's my prediction.

[SrMeowMeow]

Hi, have we met? I'm Frequently Glib.

As I've stated, my opinions are rooted in watching Arrieta's games. All of them. I can't recall very many times where I sat back and thought to myself, "well, that was unlucky." And I'm sorry if it's frustrating, but I'm simply not going to dedicate the time to digging up numbers to make your kind of argument. CA-ORIOLE alluded to some, but (1) I'm busy (i.e., I probably shouldn't even be typing this much), and (2) IMO, Arrieta's results really do speak for themselves. This isn't me looking at box scores and saying "aww, that ERA is awful." It's me paying attention to what he's done on the diamond and being completely dissatisfied. If baseball's somehow evolved beyond opinions based on that kind of information (i.e., two eyes), then it's all yours.

1) That's fine. I've seen a lot of Arrieta's games as well. And something that's very hard to see with the naked eye is broader statistical patterns - such as, for example, strand rate. Arrieta's is going to come up. And then his ERA will go down. It's going to be magical!

2) Then don't claim that something you don't understand or want to research is wrong. I mean, it's just ludicrous. I don't understand how people can say "you just have to watch the games; statistics are a waste of time for big nerds" and then in the next breath say that they don't have a firm grasp of them. How do you know something doesn't work if you don't understand it? A lot of hard work and genuine brilliance has gone into understanding baseball better via statistics and FIP is no exception. When used right, it's a powerful tool. When used wrong, it's not, just like every other thing in the history of humanity ever.

3) And if any baseball team today tries to evaluate players without "evolving beyond opinions based on two eyes" (or as many pairs of two eyes as they want), they will be the worst team in baseball. I guarantee it.

[MrOrange82]

Just an addendum about the difference between Jake's ERA and FIP (1.80). One pitcher in baseball history has sustained a higher difference (i.e. defied his FIP), and he was Bill Kissinger, who played from 1895-1897. In the last 50 years, the highest difference in ERA and FIP has been 1.16. Only seven pitchers have sustained a difference above 1.00. There is no physical possibility that Jake is as bad as his ERA looks. It is impossible. His ERA is inflated because of factors outside his pitching performances (i.e. defense, bad luck). I will put any money you like on his ERA going forwards being closer to his 2012 FIP to date than his 2012 ERA to date.

Tell you what...I think e-wagers are dumb, so I won't propose actual gambling...BUT, Arrieta's ERA currently stands at 5.81. His FIP is 4.01. My guess is that his FIP's going to rise and his ERA's going to fall by year's end.

Still...we've got 97 and 2/3 innings of 5.81 ball. If Arrieta adds another 97 and 2/3 innings of "FIP" ball (i.e., pitching to at/around a 4.01 ERA), his season-ending ERA will be approximately 4.91. If his final ERA hits at or below that number, I won't raise these kinds of arguments against Arrieta ever again.

[SrMeowMeow]

Well if its not his pitching then its the "factors outside his pitching performance" which indicates that these factors only happen to him since he is the only pitcher on the team with that large a differential between FIP and ERA.

Also FIP assumes that all balls are hit equally ...they do not take into account factors like line drives etc which if you look at Jake gets tattooed a lot by

All I am saying and have been saying is that the guy cant get out of the 5th inning in over half his starts, he has a 5.00 ERA + and his WHIP and W-L are not stellar. On a team trying to compete he is not ready. That does not mean he will not be good in the future or have a major role ...it means he is not ready NOW

I don't think the team has a friggin' curse on it. Of course they're individual factors. Arrieta has seen teams bunch hits together against him. He has never indicated a tendency to struggle with runners on in the past. A lot of baseball is random and it's random chance that every year some pitchers will, through no fault of their own, have their hits and homers occur in clumps instead of being spaced out. I know people want to believe in bearing down etc. but it just doesn't reflect reality.

[SrMeowMeow]

Tell you what...I think e-wagers are dumb, so I won't propose actual gambling...BUT, Arrieta's ERA currently stands at 5.81. His FIP is 4.01. My guess is that his FIP's going to rise and his ERA's going to fall by year's end.

Still...we've got 97 and 2/3 innings of 5.81 ball. If Arrieta adds another 97 and 2/3 innings of "FIP" ball (i.e., pitching to at/around a 4.01 ERA), his season-ending ERA will be approximately 4.91. If his final ERA hits at or below that number, I won't raise these kinds of arguments against Arrieta ever again.

I think his ERA going forward will be closer to 4.01 than 5.81. Meaning, 1) I think his true ability to prevent runs is closer to his FIP so far than his ERA so far, and 2) that I'd take the under on 4.91 ERA for the rest of the season. I won't take the under on a 4.91 ERA total for the season since he already has a 5.81 ERA banked.